]]>MPs vote to reduce risk of no-deal Brexit, handing power to parliament in deciding fate of Brexit

UK premier Theresa May and her plans on delivering Brexit have suffered a heavy blow after having been defeated twice in parliament over amendments that would reduce the risk of the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal.

On Tuesday, Labour MP Yvette Cooper tabled an amendment to the Finance Bill that would prohibit government ministers from spending on preparations for a no-deal Brexit and prevent the government from surpassing parliament authority to achieve this. [1]

MPs voted 303 to 296 in favour of the amendment, among them were 20 Conservative MPs who defied the government whip and voted with the opposition parties. [1]

Leader of the opposition Labour party Jeremy Corbyn praised the opposition victory as an “important step” towards preventing the UK leaving the EU without a deal.

“This vote is an important step to prevent a no deal Brexit. It shows that there is no majority in Parliament, the Cabinet or the country for crashing out of the EU without an agreement,” [2] Corbyn said.

“That is why we are taking every opportunity possible in Parliament to prevent no deal. Theresa May must now rule out no deal once and for all,” he added.

On Wednesday, the government suffered yet another defeat in the House of Commons after MPs voted 308-297 in favour of an amendment that would force Theresa May to negotiate a new deal within three days of losing the vote on her Brexit deal scheduled for next week.

Unlike the first amendment that was tabled by an opposition MP, the second amendment was tabled by the Conservative MP and former attorney general Dominic Grieve who is against Brexit and is campaigning for a second referendum.

“I realise there are a few of my colleagues who believe that if the government’s deal is rejected we should simply do nothing and leave the EU on March 29 with no deal at all and with all, to my mind, the calamitous consequences that would follow on from it,” [3] Grieve said.

“I disagree with that, and so I think do the vast majority of members of parliament. The only way we can move forward if the government’s deal is not acceptable to parliament is for parliament to engage with government and find a solution, which is what I am trying to do,” [3] he added.

The latest defeats add more pressure to a government that has become increasingly boxed in due to the lack of support it faces in parliament and the public.

The defeats highlight the intense divisions faced by a weak Theresa May and her minority government in parliament and proves the chaos Brexit is causing in the political establishment of the UK.

During the weekly Prime Minister’s Questions in parliament, Theresa May clearly stated that the UK will be leaving the EU on March 29th and that her deal is the only alternative to a no deal. [4]

The prime minister is widely expected to lose her Brexit deal vote next week, which is said to be the most important vote in parliament, and it is uncertain what will happen next if and when her Brexit deal is voted down.

Prime Minister May postponed the vote last month after admitting that her government would’ve faced a humiliating defeat. [4]

As such, the vote will take place on January 15th and May is still expected to lose after the DUP, which props up her government, have reiterated they will still vote against her deal over opposition to the Irish backstop arrangement. [4]

May has also failed in renegotiating her deal with the EU, with officials in Brussels saying the deal on the table is non-negotiable. [4]

]]>https://www.islam21c.com/news-views/theresa-may-humiliated-by-two-defeats-on-brexit-votes-in-parliament/feed/040120Legal Challenge to Prevent Reaches Court of Appealshttps://www.islam21c.com/politics/legal-challenge-to-prevent-reaches-court-of-appeals/
https://www.islam21c.com/politics/legal-challenge-to-prevent-reaches-court-of-appeals/#respondMon, 10 Dec 2018 18:12:49 +0000https://www.islam21c.com/?p=39466This week will see the next significant step along the long path to holding the UK government to account for its policies against so-called “extremism”, including the toxic Prevent policy.

This week will see the next significant step along the long path to holding the UK government to account for its policies against so-called “extremism”, including the toxic Prevent policy.

Prevent has always been a controversial policy since it has been accused of structural racism,[1] Islamophobia,[2] being built on pseudoscience,[3][4] and being overall counter-productive to reducing terrorism and political violence.[5]

There has long been a chasm between peer reviewed research on the one hand and the Prevent lobby on the other, who for various reasons from economic to ideological uphold the notion that something called “extremism” is causally linked to “terrorism”, despite the wealth of scientific literature to the contrary.[6]

Last year a high court judgement added to this tension between Prevent’s lobbyists and those approaching it objectively, as—for the first time—the interpretation of the government’s Prevent Duty Guidance to universities and colleges was significantly restricted.[7]

This was after we brought a judicial review claim against the government in 2016,[8] arguing:

That the prevent duty guidance was unlawful, because it targeted so-called “extremism” rather than “terrorism”; casting the net of suspicion and civil liberties curtailment unlawfully wide—including the entire Muslim community on account of their otherwise legal beliefs and practices.

That the government had breached data protection and surveillance laws by effectively outsourcing surveillance to shady third-party organisations, uncovering a previously hidden relationship between a secretive department in the Home Office (called the Extremism Analysis Unit, exposed as a result of the case),[9] and the openly Islamophobic Henry Jackson Society.

In 2017 Mr Justice Ouseley released a judgement in which he ruled that the government’s Prevent duty guidance was lawful, but what is important for the public—particularly the Muslim community—is the reason why. It is because he interpreted the government’s Prevent guidance as being highly restricted compared to how it had been (and continues to be) interpreted and implemented—including by the government itself.

He said it was legal because:

Prevent does not apply to so-called “extremism” per se, but only to that which leads people into terrorism.

The Prevent “duty” is not really a “duty”. No one has to follow it; the guidance is only a recommendation. Public bodies can simply read it and decide not to implement any of it due to other considerations. This includes the infamously ambiguous definition of so-called “non-violent extremism” (opposition to fundamental “British Values”).

As a result of the judgement, many higher education institutions and public bodies were able to revise their policies to disregard the discriminatory Prevent duty guidance and give more weight to their responsibilities to prevent discrimination of minorities and ensure free communication of ideas on campus,[10] including in the government’s own revised policies and guidance thereafter.

However, despite this, those in the Prevent lobby with a professional or ideological investment into Prevent have continued to champion it, cite it to intimidate organisations or venues to cancel events and push assimilationist agendas against minorities (particularly Muslims), uphold myths about the causes of terrorism, and demonise Prevent’s critics. They have been able to get away with this partly due to the still confusing (and often contradictory) messaging and guidance issued by government departments and media outlets, and the overall lack of clarity in the public domain about the legal and scientific status of Prevent.

As we believe Mr Justice Ouseley’s judgement did not go far enough in highlighting this, this week we will be taking our judicial review claim to the Court of Appeal, arguing the same grounds. Furthermore, due to the “legal significance” of this case the Court has chosen it to be live streamed to the public. Live-streaming of selected cases began in November 2018 to improve public access to, and understanding of, the work of the courts.

]]>https://www.islam21c.com/politics/legal-challenge-to-prevent-reaches-court-of-appeals/feed/039466Anti-Muslim Hate ‘Poisoning’ the Conservative Governmenthttps://www.islam21c.com/politics/anti-muslim-hate-poisoning-the-conservative-government/
https://www.islam21c.com/politics/anti-muslim-hate-poisoning-the-conservative-government/#respondSun, 03 Jun 2018 16:53:22 +0000https://www.islam21c.com/?p=33694Peter Oborne: “But I am afraid her party is guilty of the same crime, only against Muslims rather than against Jews. That May herself is willing to walk side by side with Bob Blackman sends out a distressing message about the values of Theresa May's Conservative Party.”

]]>The Conservative party has been accused of deeply entrenched anti-Muslim bigotry. An open letter from Harun Khan, Chairman of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), called for an inquiry into Islamophobia which had “poisoned” sections of the Tory Party. This letter has been given considerable weight by Tory peers Lord Sheikh and Syeeda Warsi. Lady Warsi, who, despite being the first Muslim in Cabinet, resigned with dignity in protest at the Conservative Party’s attitude to the crimes in Gaza calling the policy “morally indefensible” in 2014.[1] Lord Sheikh on the 1st of June 2018 wrote to Theresa May detailing his concerns about anti-Muslim bigotry within the Conservative Party citing as examples the disgraceful dog whistle campaign of Zac Goldsmith for the London Mayoral elections in 2016 and Conservative Bob Blackman MP.[2]

Sayeeda Warsi said she had spent more than two years attempting but ultimately failing to get her successors and Theresa May to firstly acknowledge, let alone address the problem of Islamophobia. It seems, sadly, that the current Government, cares little for anti-Muslim bigotry within its own party and moreover in the wider community. In this climate, it is little surprise that anti-Muslim hate crime has soared, with an average of more than four anti-Muslim hate crimes per day in London alone in 2017.[3]

The chairman of the MCB cited examples of Conservative party members calling Muslims “parasites” and another who suggested using bacon hanging from a door to “protect your house from Terrorism” – another widespread example of conflating Terrorism with normative Islam. In particular the chairman of the MCB asked why no action had been taken against Tory MP Bob Blackman.

MP for Harrow East, Bob Blackman was singled out as a particularly vile example of Islamophobia within the Conservative party. Blackman made the headlines in 2012 when publicly ridiculed and accused of hypocrisy for praising marriage only to have his 11-year-old affair with a fellow Conservative councillor exposed.[4] Blackman is still an influential member of the Tory Party as joint-secretary and executive member of the powerful 1922 committee. So, it was even more shocking when the experienced MP re-tweeted an anti-Islam message from notorious Islamophobe, fascist sympathiser and criminal Tommy Robinson.

Blackman also hosted another criminal, Hindu nationalist, Tapan Ghosh in Parliament. Just how Tapan Ghosh, who has been jailed five times in India for stoking religious tensions,[5] was able to obtain a visa and entry into the UK is unclear but suggests the government is so preoccupied with Muslim “hardliners” (such as the founder of PEACE TV)[6] it has failed to identify those of other faiths. Blackman’s notorious guest of honour Ghosh, who has previously praised the genocide of Rohingya Refugees,[7] called for the UN to control the birth rate of Muslims, and supported claims one million children in the UK have been raped by Muslims,[8] also attended an event with former cabinet ministers Amber Rudd and Priti Patel, and met with former “neo-Nazi leader” Tommy Robinson.[9]

Bob Blackman has form for courting controversy. Only a few months ago he embroiled himself in another controversy after sharing a story which had the headline: “Muslim Somali sex gang say raping white British children ‘part of their culture’.” The story was on a website called Hardcore News USA, which often features Islamophobic “stories”.[10] Despite over 10% of Bob Blackman’s constituency being made up of Muslims, the MP for Harrow East has never visited a mosque in his local area.[11] Furthermore, Bob Blackman describes himself as a “Chrinjew – a Christian with Jewish roots, and an honorary Hindu”[12] – potentially isolating the 10,000 Muslims in his constituency.

Award winning Journalist, Peter Oborne commented:

“In recent months the Tory party has made a great deal – and rightly so – of the anti-Semitism charges against Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party. Let’s just imagine that there had been a Labour MP who encouraged anti-Semites in the way Bob Blackman gives space to those who hate Muslims.

“Let’s imagine a Labour MP hosted an anti-Semite in the House of Commons in this way. It would be unacceptable. The offender would likely be suspended from the party, if not expelled. May would rightly condemn them.

“But I am afraid her party is guilty of the same crime, only against Muslims rather than against Jews. That May herself is willing to walk side by side with Bob Blackman sends out a distressing message about the values of Theresa May’s Conservative Party.”

Given the insurmountable prima facie evidence of anti-Muslim bigotry within the Conservative Party, it is difficult to see how Prime Minister May, who has a statutory mandate to govern for all including the Muslim citizens, can ignore calls for an independent enquiry. If, Prime Minister May continues to ignore these siren calls of anti-Muslim bigotry, the question which must be asked is: Why?

“…Hopefully we will never have to use this power, but there will never be a time that we are not the most powerful nation in the world!”[1]

Similarly, Israel recently had posters up in the country which read: “Zionism is an infinite ideal”. In both cases, it is clear that both nations consider themselves to be invincible, and this is again clear through their provocative actions in opening the latest settlement outpost in Al-Quds, the American Embassy. Many such as Israeli scholar Dr Mordechai Kedar have claimed on the back of the embassy move that ‘Israel is invincible’.

America is by all accounts considered today as the leader of the Western World and its authority is acknowledged, rightly or wrongly, by all over the world. The acid test therefore in assessing and measuring Western “Civilisation” is by evaluating America itself.

In comparison to many others, America is a young nation which was founded in the 18th Century, and yet, within this relatively short lifespan of just over 200 years, you will find a history which is dogged with genocide, torture, slavery, mass surveillance, lynching, racial injustice and prejudice – which is still of course happening right before the world’s eye with the constant reported police brutality against Black Americans. In the same way that America is built upon the genocide and oppression of the indigenous, European settler colonialism and continued oppression of people of other races, Israel similarly was constructed on the back of treachery and deceit, ethnic cleansing, settler colonialism, and continued oppression of the Palestinians, Muslims, Christians and Africans. Its inception is oppression and injustice. The leaders and financial elites of both nations are therefore causing inequality to grow, and injustices to prosper.

The motto America adopts is“In God we Trust”, but is it is clear from their history and their present state that there is nothing godly about their actions, highlighting the root of this issue that America, and the Western World in general, have lost all moral values.

The genealogy of Western civilisations such as that of America reaches back to the ancient Greek and Roman civilisations; it was the result of both of these civilisations that modern western civilisation, which of course is epitomised by America today, acquired the attributes of materialism, secularism, nationalism, and amoralism. The idea underlying the Roman Empire was conquest of power and the exploitation of other nations for the benefit of the mother country alone. To promote better living for a privileged group, for the Romans no violence was too harsh and no injustice too base. The famous “Roman justice” was justice in favour of the Romans alone.

America and Trump would do well to reflect on those mighty ancient empires. By doing so, they would learn that there is indeed a Divine natural order to things: of waxing strong, then waning again. This Divine natural order includes empires and kingdoms and also civilisations, which have their own life cycle. They pass through the exuberance of youthfulness into a vibrant maturity and then, later, as old age approaches, comes a time when strength is sapped by carousing and feasting, and purpose is blunted by excesses and circuses.

Allāh tells us as much in the Qur’ān when He (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) says:

“Allāh is the one who created you from weakness, then made after weakness strength, then made after strength weakness and white hair. He creates what He wills, and He is the Knowing, the Competent.[2]

In another verse, Allāh says:

“O people! if you are in doubt about the raising, then surely We created you from dust, then from a small seed, then from a clot, then from a lump of flesh, complete in make and incomplete, that We may make clear to you; and We cause what We please to stay in the wombs until an appointed time, then We bring you forth as babies, then that you may attain your maturity; and of you is he who is caused to die, and of you is he who is brought back to the worst part of life, so that after having knowledge he does not know anything; and you see the earth sterile land, but when We send down on it the water, it stirs and swells and brings forth of every kind a beautiful herbage.”[3]

History shows two things are needed for the walls to finally fall on any empire. First is weakness on the part of the empire, or civilisation; weakness that results when pursuit of pleasure becomes the main purpose of being for the leaders and the citizens, no longer the reward for achieving success in other, more important areas of national endeavour, such as ensuring internal stability, maintaining external security and the creation of material wealth.

Allāh says in the Qur’ān:

“Has not the account reached you of those before you, of the people of Nūḥ and ʿĀd and Thamūd, and those after them?…”[4]

One of the common themes you will find in each of the above stories and the destruction of nations as set out in the Qur’ān is that, immediately before their destruction, they were led by arrogant and haughty leaders who rejected the truth and took an antagonistic stand towards the believers. Impeding and oppressing them, they were enraged at being called to the message of truth. In many instances they would invite destruction on themselves through arrogance claiming they were invincible. For example, did not the people of Nūḥ (ʿalayhi al-Salām) say to him “… bring us what you threaten us with if you are truthful”?[5] Did not the people of Hūd (ʿalayhi al-Salām) say “… then bring on us what you threaten us with, if you are of the truthful ones”?[6] Did not the people of Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al-Salām) say to him “… Oh Ṣāliḥ, bring us that which you threatened us with if you are a Messenger of Allāh”?[7]

Allāh says:

“The Thamud (people) rejected (their prophet) through their inordinate wrong-doing. Behold the most wicked Man among them was deputed (for impiety).“[8]

The world has witnessed America elect one of the most wicked amongst them to carry out the impiety of leading a nation who is considered one of the biggest obstacles to world peace.[9]

The mighty Persian Empire lacked a strong ruler after the death of Xerxes (486-464 BCE). This led to internal commotion, fight for power and infamous revolts. These wars and revolts led to turmoil in the Persian economy making them ripe to be destroyed by Alexander.

It is difficult to reach a conclusive verdict on why the Western Roman Empire fell. It was a long and complex process. If there was a simple answer, the Romans would surely have found it. Whatever the reasons, throughout the fifth century, when emperors could find money and assemble troops, the Roman army was a powerful and effective force. The institution itself was not at fault, but the support it received from its commanders-in-chief, the Emperors, was often lacking. If there was perhaps a single reason for the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, it was poor leadership, not military failure.

Shaykh Abul Hassan Ali Nadwi (rahimahullāh) quoting Robert Briffault (The Making of Humanity) writes on the flailing Roman Empire:

“The intrinsic cause that doomed the Roman Empire was not any growing corruption, but the corruption, the evil, the inadaptation to facts in its origin and being. No system of human organisation that is false in its very principle, in its very foundation, can save itself by any amount of cleverness and efficiency in the means by which that falsehood is carried out and maintained, by any amount of superficial adjustment and tinkering. It is doomed root and branch as long as the root remains what it was. the Roman Empire was… a device for the enrichment of a small class of people by the exploitation of mankind.”[10]

The Aztec culture was sophisticated. Its language, Nahuatl, was a rich one. Its mathematics, advanced. Its empire was won and controlled by a fiercely successful military and an elaborate system of taxation and tribute. Yet in just two years, Moctezuma’s rule, and that of the Mexica, collapsed in the face of an invasion led by a few hundred Spanish adventurers bringing an abrupt end to 200 years of Aztec rule.

The same also applies with many of the Muslim dynasties as we saw with the Taifa (Petty) Kings in Spain; the sons of Salāḥuddīn after his death with the Ayyubids, and the Mughals of India after the death of Aurangzeb where weak leaders preceded the downfall of the Empire.

If we are to take the Roman Empire as an example, those in power appeased their populace through “bread and circuses”. The term refers to the idea that a person can be subjugated through superficial distraction and gratification; food and entertainment; indulgence and decadence. With a person’s mind occupied and enslaved – roiling in self-gratification, immorality and gluttony – they are placated and subdued, and subsequently less likely to take to account the politics and governance of their lands and the actions made on behalf of their nations. Such is the situation today. Consider, then, that when those in power are left unchecked their nations eventually fall, heedless and powerless.[11]

Points to Note:

The United States is in steep decline and there is no doubt that its best days are now behind it. What the fall of the Aztec rule as referred to above highlights to us is that no matter how advanced, sophisticated and powerful a nation may be, when Allāh decrees their end, it can happen in a very swift manner. This is also a consistent thread that runs through the Qur’ān and the descriptive accounts of how Allāh brought an end to tyrannical rule before.

Death is the end for all of us: the oppressor and the oppressed, the mighty and the feeble, the rich and the poor. Our death is no novelty. Nations before have gone and nations after will perish.

Ibn Batuta related that in the north, there is a graveyard with one thousand kings buried in it. At the entrance of this graveyard is a board that reads:

“The Kings: ask the dirt about them,

And about the great leaders; they are all bones now.”

As Allāh says:

“Can you find a single one of them or hear even a whisper of them?”[12]

This lesson needs to resonate within all of our hearts. The political elites of Western nation states and their propped satellites may seem to posit themselves as undefeatable, imperishable and to those living within it, destined to rule forever long, however we know from our Ḍīn, from Allāh, of how many powerful, arrogant civilisations built on oppression, and that have in turn continued to project oppression upon the weak, poor and unarmed, have disintegrated.

The downfall of US Imperialism and its systematic, industrialised oppression will also usher in the end of other oppressive states that it upholds and who are dependent on its ongoing rule, such as its proxy dictators over Muslim lands and of course, Israel. In the same way that arrogant civilisations in the past directly called upon the believers and the Prophet of their time to invoke against them, so too today we see nations such as Israel doing the same because, without fail, nearly every Ramaḍān they decide to engage in “war” – implying an equal footing as opposed to the more fitting nomenclature of “genocide” – with the Palestinians. They do this against themselves as, though many Muslims may forget the plight of the Palestinians throughout the year, Israel’s annual slaughter reminds them to make duʿā’ (supplicate) against the Zionist entity in the month of Ramaḍān where supplications are not rejected:

“There are three whose supplication is not rejected: The fasting person when he breaks his fast; the just leader, and the supplication of the oppressed person…”[13]

In response to the question as to whether America and Israel are invincible as both appear to believe, what we do know for certain is that the resolve of the Palestinians to resist is indeed invincible, however I will leave you with the response of our creator, Allāh:

“We have destroyed many a generation before them who surpassed them in riches and outward glitter.” … “How many generations We have destroyed before them! Do they perceive a single one of them now, or hear as much as a whisper?[14]

]]>https://www.islam21c.com/islamic-thought/are-america-israel-invincible/feed/032775The Windrush scandal is just the tip of the racist iceberg in British politicshttps://www.islam21c.com/politics/the-windrush-scandal-is-just-the-tip-of-the-racist-iceberg-in-british-politics/
https://www.islam21c.com/politics/the-windrush-scandal-is-just-the-tip-of-the-racist-iceberg-in-british-politics/#respondTue, 01 May 2018 18:23:15 +0000https://www.islam21c.com/?p=32147Many of MPs lamenting the Windrush scandal supported the legislation that paved the way for it in the first place—the Immigration Act 2014

]]>The Windrush scandal has really caused a political storm for the current Tory government. The Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, has been forced to resign effectively due to following the footsteps of Theresa May. The previous Home Secretary and now Prime Minister who was the architect of the law which has caused this furore, is being rightly pressured to change current legislation. As such, a letter signed by 200 MPs has been handed to Theresa May asking her to enshrine in law the promises that she has been making to resolve the current Windrush crisis.[1]

However, it is somewhat ironic that many of the MPs who backed the Immigration Act 2014 are now calling for its amendment. Back in 2014, against the backdrop of a coalition government, a tidal wave of austerity and sentiments of anti-immigration and refugee ‘hostility’, the government had no problem in getting the legislation through parliament. In fact, a mere handful of MPs barely numbering in their dozens voted against the blatantly racist Immigration Act of 2014.[2] For the record—particularly for those who now wish to tarnish these individuals with fabricated charges of racism and anti-Semitism—these honourable MPs included the likes of Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell.

Nevertheless, the Immigration Act of 2014 shamefully enshrined in law blatantly racist policies which now mean that, at all walks of civil society, one’s immigration status is continually being checked. As such, the verification of one’s immigration status is no longer just the preserve of the port of entry to the UK, but has been extended to become a means of ‘entitlement’ for all aspects of life such as work, education, health provision, renting a home and even the ability to travel. Most people did not object to such a change because there was a misguided view that this would only affect ‘illegal’ immigrants. But as recent heart-wrenching stories have shown, our political masters were not bothered that others were being victimised, because as far as they were concerned, as long as it targeted those who were not ‘British’ in their warped sense of reality, then they were ‘rightly’ inflicting a “hostile environment”.[3]

So what is the ‘Muslim’ significance in all of this?

The Immigration Act of 2014 made one other massively significant change which is rarely mentioned. The Act introduced new powers to revoke citizenship from individuals considered ‘prejudicial’ to the UK, even where doing so would render them stateless. This form of punishment is so disproportionate that in 1954 a US Supreme Court struck down a law which would have enabled the US government to take away citizenship as a form of punishment. In fact, they were so scathing of even the mere thought, that they went on to say that an individual who loses their citizenship is akin to one who “has lost the right to have rights.”[4]

Nevertheless, our very own country has seen fit, aided and abetted by Theresa May’s Immigration Act 2014, to revoke citizenship from many so-called criminals, jihadists and terrorists, who are deemed as being ‘prejudicial’ to the UK. Exact numbers of those who have been stripped of their citizenship are hard to come by, however a Guardian article dated the 30th July 2017 stated as its headline that, the UK ‘has stripped 150 jihadists and criminals of citizenship’.[5]

Unlike those who have suffered under the Windrush scandal, the public will have very little sympathy due to the fact that these are, as they say, ‘jihadists and criminals’, despite the decision to remove citizenship being based on arbitrary decisions of the Home Secretary, importantly meaning that all it could take is an accusation, rather than having to be proven in an open court of law. Moreover, there is even less sympathy knowing that most, if not all, are Muslims. Nevertheless, as Muslims, we need to expose and condemn, at every opportunity, a law which is wrong, disproportionate and ultimately racist in both its context and its application. It may be used against Muslims today, but it will only be a matter of time before that circle widens.

]]>https://www.islam21c.com/politics/the-windrush-scandal-is-just-the-tip-of-the-racist-iceberg-in-british-politics/feed/032147May is playing a dangerous game exploiting Finsbury Park attackhttps://www.islam21c.com/politics/may-is-playing-a-dangerous-game-exploiting-finsbury-park-attack/
https://www.islam21c.com/politics/may-is-playing-a-dangerous-game-exploiting-finsbury-park-attack/#commentsThu, 22 Jun 2017 09:49:41 +0000https://www.islam21c.com/?p=27182If we are not very careful right now, then our horror, anger and frustration provoked by the rising and increasingly violent tide of Islamophobia will be misused against us.

As expected, many have parachuted into the aftermath of the Finsbury Park attack this week to exploit or control narratives surrounding it. It is important now more than ever for those committed to truth and justice to resist this.

Many of us were up late on the 24th night of Ramadān glued to social media feeds of brothers and sisters on the scene of what is now being called an alleged terrorist attack. 47-year-old Darren Osborne was alleged to have targeted and ran over crowds of Muslims after tarawīh prayers, before which, according to witnesses, shouting “I’m going to kill all Muslims… I’ve done my part.”[1]

The reaction from the vast majority of the British public I observed—in the “real world”, ignoring twitter Islamophobes—was very positive and constructive. The reaction from the Muslims local to the area, including those who were themselves injured, was exemplary (māshāAllāh) and continues to inspire many. The actions of one of the Imams of the local community impressed a wide spectrum of society from bringing J K Rowling to tears,[2] to even being hailed as a “hero Imam” by the same right wing newspapers that would any other day jump at the opportunity to smear him.

The following morning Theresa May delivered the usual speech,[3] which impressed some, surprised some and no doubt outraged others. Some were surprised, for example, that despite her and her party’s record, she was finally seen to utter the word “Islamophobia” in a seemingly intentional sense. However, many Muslims and non-Muslims alike reacted with a palpable sense of scandal to what has been described as her “exploiting” of the tragedy, of which we saw echoes in the Queen’s speech. I believe if we are not very careful right now, then our horror, anger and frustration provoked by the rising and increasingly violent tide of Islamophobia will be misused against us.

Misappropriation of “Islamophobia”

“As I said here two weeks ago, there has been far too much tolerance of extremism in our country over many years – and that means extremism of any kind, including Islamophobia.”

Many have expressed an understandable cynicism with Theresa May of all people talking about Islamophobia,[4] whilst others have seen its inclusion into the ‘extremism’ and ‘counter terrorism’ paradigm particularly deliberate and very worrying.[5] She is, after all, someone who has increasingly been seen as partly responsible for the spreading and mainstreaming of Islamophobia in the first place.

This is a person whose party has been studiously ignoring Islamophobia for years despite a senior member calling it out.[6] This is the former Home Secretary who “refused to engage” with a cross-government Anti-Muslim Hatred Working Group which led to the resignation of prominent academics,[7] one of whom said the fight against Islamophobia was “going backwards”.[8] This is the same person that continually pushed for draconian policies which led to an irrational suspicion of Muslims based on pseudoscience and a systematic ignoring statistics and academic research.[9] This is the leader of the party that manufactured and sustained a false continuum between orthodox Islamic beliefs (as benign as inheritance) with the likes of ISIS and terrorism,[10] and normalised metaphors like “swamp”, “crocodiles” and “trojan horse” to describe non-violent, law-abiding Muslims with beliefs they disagree with.

Almost axiomatically, such a person should not be afforded the privilege to define how we talk about and respond to Muslim suffering.

But even if one were to ignore all of that, and presume that the Tories were to have epiphanically repented for their sins, there are serious negative consequences of spinning narratives surrounding Islamophobia into the tangled web of “extremism” and “counter terrorism”.

For a start, it is likely to prevent the structural and institutionalised nature of Islamophobia being exposed and challenged. It will almost certainly be used to absolve the political elite of their responsibility in the scapegoating of Muslim-ness based on disinformation, stoking irrational and statistically insignificant fears, and feeding the already obese counter terrorism apparatus, which an increasing number of academics blame for the rise in Islamophobia,[11] calling it one of the “five pillars of Islamophobia”.[12]

Where will the blame instead go?

May’s dangerous chess game of divide and rule

Instead of shining a long-overdue spotlight into the structural and institutional spheres of Islamophobia (and racism generally for that matter), placing it into “extremism” and “counter terrorism” box is already severing its centuries old roots and, as Dr Chris Allen suggested, will likely cause Islamophobia to be instead seen as a reaction to Muslim “terrorism”.[13] Indeed, one does not need to look far to find an ignoramus that would refer to the Finsbury Park attack as a ‘revenge attack’ but would throw a fit if someone referred to something like 7/7 or the Lee Rigby murder as such, despite being explicitly-stated by their misguided perpetrators.

Not only that, but as some have pointed out, the image projected of the quintessential Islamophobe is not the blazered middle-class demagogue from the Henry Jackson Society or Quilliam Foundation who provides the carefully crafted fallacies and ideological tinder for Islamophobia on national prime time television.[14][15][16][17] It is rather the lowest, despised “hooligans” of the white working classes that make up the ranks of the EDL or Britain First.

In doing so this perpetuates not just the class war that has been happening since long before Islām arrived on these shores, but Islamophobia itself. Those “peasants” that have been stolen from, disempowered, exploited and left to starve for decades if not centuries by their elite will continue to be conditioned to blame their problems on scapegoats—including Muslims and immigrants—rather than the real causes of their unhappiness. Some may not like to admit this but a large number of those put into the stereotypical “far-right racist” demographic probably have far more basic needs and interests in common with the Muslims they are taught to hate than with the elite that are conditioning them to hate.

Attempted resurrection of the failed “extremism” bill

In her speech May mentioned Islamophobia once, Muslims three times and Extremism seven times. Many had anticipated the exploiting of the Finsbury Park attack to try to revive the perennial failure that is her Counter Extremism Bill proposals. Attempts to make this law have consistently failed because legal experts and members of parliament kept bringing up inconvenience of the vacuous and arbitrary definition of “extremism” itself, which May seemed to be trying to get around by calling for a new “Commission for Countering Extremism as a statutory body” in her speech. She also stated,

“It is why we will be reviewing our Counter-Terrorism strategy and ensuring that police and security services have the powers they need.”

For me this was a chilling echo of her swift call for a public inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire, instead of an inquest which, according to solicitor Sophie Khan, was indicative of her trying to control the outcome or prevent the fairer, transparent and open scrutiny that an inquest would offer victims and their families. Khan told the BBC,

“I’m very concerned as to why Ms May came out so quickly to say, ‘public inquiry’. What is there, that she knows, that needs to be hidden?”[18]

Who is the “we” that will be reviewing the Counter Terrorism strategy? Is Ms May trying to get away with an internal, superficial revamp of the failed and now publicly toxic PREVENT strategy instead of the complete, transparent, accountable and public review that is so desperately required? Is she going to allow—for once—the wisdom of peer reviewed academic research to guide how we approach “terrorism” in this country, or continue to give undeserved, undemocratic and unaccountable free reign for those with a vested ideological or economic interest in telling the public who they should be afraid and suspicious of?

Also not unnoticed was her diverting attention away from the real and oft-repeated resource needs of austerity-starved police forces up and down the country. The last thing they need are even more powers to arbitrarily restrict people’s rights and destroy community cohesion and policing by consent.

The mob must resist its thirst for blood

It is natural sometimes for those harmed by others to harbour a sense of revenge or retribution. This primal rage is what has been exploited historically for governments to gain more powers after a terrorist attack, and this is precisely what Theresa May stands accused of doing. As satisfying to the nafs (lower self, ego) that may be, Muslims do not have the option to respond to an injustice with injustice.

Instead of desiring that non-violent Islamophobes and their families have to suffer the same humiliation and demonisation that scores of Muslims have suffered, or desiring that their families and friends’ homes are raided (referred to as “terror networks” later released without charge after the damage has been done), or that their children are taken away from them; we should take this opportunity to call for no one to be subjected to the inherently discriminatory, “two-tier justice system” that is the counter terrorism circus. History has shown that state suppression of ‘radical’ political views or grievances actually ignites some towards violence as it restricts their choices for peaceful protest. But more importantly than that, the main reason we should not be fooled into tolerating the failed PREVENT policy once angry white people start to suffer from it is because we have a divine obligation.

O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allāh, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allāh is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allāh is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.[19]

O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allāh, witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allāh; indeed, Allāh is Acquainted with what you do.[20]

As tempting as it is to demonise and silence Islamophobic Neanderthals and their ideologues at any cost, our desires have to come second to the obedience of Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā). We all have to be a manifestation of the small group of believers—who no doubt some call ‘Islamist extremists’ or whatever pejorative—who protected the very man who killed their loved ones on the night of the attack,[21] in obedience to the sharia of Allāh and the prohibition of the Prophet (sall Allāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam) for anyone to be punished without a fair hearing—at a time where mob justice and Trial by Ordeal were the dominant “British values” of the day.

Holding media to account

Finally a similar level of restraint needs to be shown when we expect mass media outrage and rolling coverage of the increasing number of crimes against Muslims. Of course there is an abhorrent disparity in the way in which crimes are reported based on the ethnicity of the perpetrators and/or victims. However when it comes to the hysterical news coverage of so-called “terror attacks” that has led to mass panic and irrational suspicion of “Islamic extremists” or terrorism generally (which kills fewer people in England and Wales every year than bathtubs do,)[22] we should not demand that hysterical rolling news coverage should follow every white murderer, but that there should be no sensationalised coverage of any crime for a simple reason. As Forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz scolded BBC Newsnight years ago:

“Everytime we have intense saturation coverage of a mass murder, we expect to see one or two more within a week.”[23]

And indeed, since the Finsbury Park attack East London Mosque was subjected to a bomb scare,[24] and two people have been arrested on consecutive nights at Regents Park mosque allegedly trying to harm worshippers.[25] Just as we criticise the “mainstream” media’s hysterical (and often lionising) depiction of ISIS (which many even advertise to Muslim psychopaths with the undeserved noble title of “Islamic State”) and acts of senseless violence commit by deranged and often suicidal Muslims, we should not ask for the same reckless coverage of serious crimes committed by others because, as psychologists warn, this contributes to an increase in those crimes,[26]—a destructive cycle we have also seen with crimes committed by Muslims using mind-altering drugs,[27] sadly sensationalised all too quickly as “terrorism”.

We must act and take leadership

In summary, I believe we should be resisting attempts from outside the Muslim community and within to apply similar unfair and destructive treatment to those who harm or annoy us. We should hold those in power to account in general and in particular call for Theresa May’s “review” of the counter terrorism strategy to be done under the scrutiny of public accountability. Whilst we should not succumb to supporting draconian policies against non-violent Islamophobes (or their families), we certainly must still speak out and refute the lies, disinformation and propaganda, and hold the media to account,[28] as well as continue to push for a Levison-compliant, truly independent press regulator to make a more responsible and fairer press possible.

We have a divine obligation to resist injustice, take charge of our own narratives and be steadfast. Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) has given us an important reminder regarding the plots of those that hate us:

If good touches you, it distresses them; but if harm strikes you, they rejoice at it. But if you are patient and fear Allāh, their plot will not harm you at all. Indeed, Allāh is encompassing of what they do.[29]

]]>https://www.islam21c.com/politics/may-is-playing-a-dangerous-game-exploiting-finsbury-park-attack/feed/727182London Inferno: A tale of two citieshttps://www.islam21c.com/politics/london-inferno-a-tale-of-two-cities/
https://www.islam21c.com/politics/london-inferno-a-tale-of-two-cities/#respondSun, 18 Jun 2017 17:07:41 +0000https://www.islam21c.com/?p=27079Laughing with your friends as you walk back from the night prayer. Looking forward to seeing your wife and then eating the suhūr together. Perhaps letting your mind wander to what you should buy for your children’s Eid presents. Suddenly you see hint of a flame in the distance. Your pace quickens. Perplexed, you wonder ...

]]>Laughing with your friends as you walk back from the night prayer. Looking forward to seeing your wife and then eating the suhūr together. Perhaps letting your mind wander to what you should buy for your children’s Eid presents. Suddenly you see hint of a flame in the distance. Your pace quickens. Perplexed, you wonder which building is on fire. Panic grips. You realise it is your home. You race to your family. Held back by the police who tell you they are safe. You watch in disbelief as the flames engulf the building in minutes. Trapped residents throw their children from the buildings whilst others leap out themselves. The true extent of horror to only be realised in the morning.

Much has been made of the ‘official’ death toll. Ridiculous figures of 12 then 30 were published by the media, yet it was plain to see that the real numbers would be considerably higher. So why is the real death toll being held back from the public? Is there a plan to withhold the true figure until the media spotlight moves on to the next story? The authorities’ attempted management of (and haste to quell) the survivors’ grief and pain by co-ordinating the slow release of information is shocking. Why was Lilly Allen silenced after questioning why the true death toll was being concealed, and her invitation to appear on Newsnight withdrawn?[1] The BBC is paid for by the license fee that you and I pay. It is not meant to be a mouthpiece for anyone but the people.

It came as no surprise when Theresa May chose not to visit the survivors. However, what is more outrageous is the reason given: “security concerns”. What security concerns? Are we being asked to believe that the demographic of the victims suggests they are a threat, despite the horrors they have just witnessed? An unreserved apology from Downing Street should be made and those media outlets who tacitly condoned this reason should hang their heads in shame. It should be noted that other public officials, such as Sadiq Khan, who faced the residents’ ire with good grace, Jeremy Corbyn and even the Queen and Prince William felt able to meet and mingle with the victims free from any such “security concerns”. Also telling is that David Cameron met with residents of the devastating floods in Cumbria in 2015 without any such security concerns being cited.

The Grenfell inferno was not the first fire in a high rise building. In 2009 a blaze in Lakanal House in Camberwell, south-east London, resulted in the deaths of 6 people: three women and three children. The report which followed was published in 2013 and recommended a full fire safety review. Gavin Barwell, who currently is Chief of Staff, but in 2013 was housing minister “sat on” this review for 4 years.[2] As is being reported, had the authorities acted on that report, perhaps this tragedy could have been reduced or avoided altogether.

It has also emerged that Brandon Lewis, who has recently been promoted to immigration minister, declined in 2014 to compel building developers to install sprinklers. As the managing director of Fire Protection Association said, a sprinkler system would have “undoubtedly” saved lives at Grenfell Tower. Instead, Mr Lewis told MPs: “The cost of fitting a fire sprinkler system may affect house building—something we want to encourage.” Unfortunately it is no longer a surprise in today’s world to see admissions of putting profit before poor people’s lives.[3]

Despite the reported £10 million spent on refurbishing Grenfell Tower, the cheaper, less safe cladding was used—which has been reported as the cause of the fire spreading outside the building, turning an isolated fire in one flat into the whole building being engulfed. For just £2/square meter more, the greater fire retardant, safer cladding could have been used, and potentially lives saved.[4] Even more unbelievable it has also now emerged that the dangerous cladding used in Grenfell Tower was banned in Europe and the UK.[5] Once again, profit above poor people’s lives. It should not be forgotten that the Grenfell Tower inferno occurred in one of the wealthiest places on earth. Whilst the council was niggling over £2, dozens of luxury properties built for foreign investors were lying empty, just streets away.

Perhaps most despicably and as recently as 2016, Conservative MPs voted down an amendment proposed by Labour that was aiming to ensure rental properties were “fit for human habitation”. It transpired that 72 of those Tory MPs who voted against the bill were themselves landlords.[6] The combination of vested interest and access to power is a concerning and—as this tragic event has demonstrated—sometimes dangerous dichotomy.

Local blog Grenfell action group repeatedly brought up concerns about fire safety but these were said to have fallen on deaf ears. However, if that building’s occupants were of a different class or socioeconomic background, would that have been the case? If they were white middle class Tory voters would that have been the case? But these were ethnic minorities drawn from the demonised “immigrant” group. Worse still, containing a large if nor predominant number of Muslims. ‘The worst of the worst.’ The minority group which has been subjected to the most vile and endemic political narrative over the last few years. Those media outlets and politicians who have participated in and encouraged the vilification of this marginalised minority and others also have blood on their hands. It is their hate-filled rhetoric against the “lower” classes which allowed an environment in which repeated concerns about fire safety could be ignored, coming as it did, from the most vulnerable members of our society. Indeed, their rhetoric continues unabated as, at the time of writing, IPSO has received over 1,000 complaints about the Daily Mail publishing photographs purporting to be of the “Ethiopian taxi driver” whose faulty fridge allegedly started the fire[7]. It seems some habits are hard to break, even at a time of immense public sadness.

This may be why Sophie Khan, solicitor for the Lakanal Tower victims called for an inquest instead of a public inquiry, into the Grenfell Tower fire.[8] Ms Khan explained that in a public inquiry, which Theresa May quickly called for, the government controls the narrative, but in an inquest the government loses control of what a jury verdict would be. Ms Khan went on to say: “I’m very concerned as to why Ms May came out so quickly to say, ‘public inquiry’. What is there, that she knows, that needs to be hidden?” Indeed many are worried that this could be a scandal that goes to the very heart of government.

Just as we hold our politicians to account we must ask questions of our Muslim leaders. After the tragedies of Manchester and London Bridge, Muslim leaders rushed to make statements. Yet after one of the worst calamities this country has seen in living memory how many Muslim leaders have stepped forward to assist those affected? Are they above sorting clothes or preparing meals? How many have gone to the grieving families and reminded them they are part of a larger family? Not all Imams are the same. One victim I spoke to said that Imām Wasim Kempson was seen on the very next morning of the blaze comforting the victims. He reminded one man whose friends had been affected by the blaze, words of our noble Messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wasallam):

“What do you regard as martyrdom?” His companions answered: “Being killed for the sake of Allah.” The Messenger of Allah (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) then said:

“Martyrdom is seven things besides being killed for the sake of Allah. The one who dies of the plague is a martyr, the one who drowns is a martyr, the one who dies of pleurisy is a martyr, the one who dies of a stomach disease is a martyr, the one who is burned to death is a martyr, the one who dies beneath a collapsed building is a martyr, and the woman who dies in pregnancy is a martyr.”[9]

Yet the Muslim community should be proud of its youth. It was the Muslim youth which rushed into the burning building saving lives. It was this Muslim youth which was celebrated by the woman in the video which has gone viral. It was also the Muslim youth which mobilised to help the victims with food, water and shelter. It was the Muslim youth which in a matter of days raised over £100,000. In such turbulent times, it is comforting to know that the principle of neighbourliness that is such a fundamental part of Islam is still being heeded today. Our noble messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said:

“Whoever believes in Allāh and the Last Day, let him honour his neighbour.”[10]

If things had been slightly different, it could have been me and my family living in Grenfell Tower, and be under no illusion, it could have been you, too. This is a country divided by its fault lines of class. Grenfell Tower inferno could be a seminal moment in British history, like the Selma to Montgomery marches in the American Civil Rights Movement. It could mark the moment when the poor and disenfranchised stand up and say:

“Enough is enough, we are also citizens of this country. We have a voice, and we must be heard.”

]]>As General Elections go, for an incumbent Prime Minister calling an election to increase her mandate based on quite stellar electoral projections, this has turned out to be quite the unmitigated, undignified and unanimous failure of gigantean proportions.

This followed a most vile and contemptuous campaign against Jeremy Corbyn, which was so lacking in substance and actual policy, that it symbolised Theresa May’s extraordinary levels of arrogance and dismissiveness towards the entire electorate. This was epitomised by a policy-starved manifesto the likes of which has never been tabled by a political party previously, together with a quite bizarre decision to not engage in debate with other party leaders.

Corbyn, on the other hand, did what comes naturally to him. He engaged, toured, discussed, answered questions and ultimately won over people in their droves. This has quite unbelievably led to one of the most amazing electoral ‘victories’ in modern times, resulting in an overall hung parliament.

As is electoral practice, the party in power prior to the election has the right to form a government. However, with the Tories calling the election to seek a ‘mandate’ to lead on the discussions into the UK’s exit from the EU, surely a lack of a parliamentary majority is clearly not a mandate. Moreover, with the Tories polling only 42% of the overall votes in the UK, they do not have any clear sort of mandate whatsoever.

However, such is the Tory desire for power, to ensure not only a hard Brexit, but also to continue the path of austerity, they are willing to sell their souls. As this article is being penned, the Tories are in negotiations with the DUP, Democratic Unionist Party, to form a minority government.

The DUP’s, stance on certain social and moral issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, are derived from its Christian roots, one of its founders being the Reverend Ian Paisley. These issues are the so-called ‘unsavoury’ reasons touted by commentators to keep the DUP at an arm’s length from government.

There are, however, two fundamental reasons why the DUP should not be allowed to form a supporting role for a Tory government.

Firstly, the Tories will most likely use the DUP’s support to facilitate their harmful policies such as a hard Brexit and a continuation of austerity. This would be contrary to Northern Ireland’s majority ‘remain’ position in last year’s EU referendum. Additionally, the UK electorate has, as a majority, rejected Tory austerity during the recent General Election.

Secondly, and far more significantly, any deal with the DUP in forming the government, will without doubt jeopardise the Good Friday Agreement for maintaining peace in Northern Ireland.

The role of the UK government together with the Irish government, as part of the Good Friday Agreement, is to be ‘neutral’ between all the political parties in Northern Ireland. Clearly, any involvement of a political party in Northern Ireland with the UK government breaches this requirement for neutrality. By way of a simple analogy, it is an expectation based on impartiality, that the referee of a football match between Manchester United and Liverpool be neutral. However, this impartiality would be called into question, if one of the teams also had a significant role in the governance of the organisation which oversees referees. Worryingly, we would not allow this for a game of football, however are seemingly willing to tolerate it in matters concerning war and peace.

The DUP have always waited in the wings to become the ‘Kingmakers’ for a future Tory government. As such, in 2015 the DUP drafted a list of their requirements for such an eventuality.[1] That moment is now well and truly here.

Despite warnings from the Irish Prime Minister, Enda Kenny, the UK’s right-wing press remain ambivalent, as the Tories play with fire in their quest for power.[2] This is in stark contrast to their labelling of Jeremy Corbyn as a ‘terrorist sympathiser’ in engaging with certain parties in trying to establish peace in both Northern Ireland and Palestine.

It is evident that the Tories will stop at nothing in their quest for power, even if it means jeopardising peace. Nevertheless, in the background, Jeremy Corbyn continues to prepare for that opportunity to step in and be the leader and Prime Minister he has clearly demonstrated that he can be.

]]>https://www.islam21c.com/politics/theresa-mays-wholly-unholy-alliance/feed/026991The BIG Discussion Webinar: General Election 2017https://www.islam21c.com/politics/the-big-discussion-webinar-general-election-2017/
https://www.islam21c.com/politics/the-big-discussion-webinar-general-election-2017/#commentsFri, 12 May 2017 17:30:36 +0000https://www.islam21c.com/?p=26287CLICK THE PLAYER ABOVE TO WATCH To vote in the General Election on 8 June, you need to register by 11:59pm on 22 May. You don’t need to register again if you’ve already registered. Click here to register online. Click to view: Source: www.islam21c.com

]]>https://www.islam21c.com/politics/the-big-discussion-webinar-general-election-2017/feed/1126287MPs’ report reveals shocking levels of food wastage across UKhttps://www.islam21c.com/news-views/mps-report-reveals-shocking-levels-of-food-wastage-across-uk/
https://www.islam21c.com/news-views/mps-report-reveals-shocking-levels-of-food-wastage-across-uk/#commentsSun, 30 Apr 2017 12:05:55 +0000https://www.islam21c.com/?p=25947In a time where food poverty in the UK is at a record high, a report published by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has highlighted a shocking level of food wastage across the country.

]]>“Eat and drink but waste not by extravagance, certainly He (Allah) likes not Al-Musrifun (those who waste by extravagance.”[1]

In a time where food poverty in the UK is at a record high, a report published by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has highlighted a shocking level of food wastage across the country.[2]

MPs have said that the level of household waste in England is “unacceptable”, and households have a key role to play in reducing it, estimating that two thirds of the potential reduction in food wastage could occur at the household level.

The report states that 7.3million tonnes of food was wasted in UK households alone in 2015, corresponding to £13billion worth of edible food. Waste reduction charity WRAP told the committee that the average household lost £470 per year because of avoidable food waste, whilst those with children wasting £700, with the average person in the UK losing £200 a year.

Not only is there a direct economic cost, but the environmental cost of such levels of wastage are also worrying. Energy and resources are being wasted in producing, packaging, transporting and storing food in the first place, only for it to be wasted and end up in landfills that produce climate-changing methane.

“Wonky vegetables”

Perhaps one of the most shocking revelations the report made was the extent to which supermarkets reject fruits and vegetables on purely cosmetic grounds, what it calls “wonky vegetables”.

They estimated that up to 25% of apples, 20% of onions and 13% of potatoes are rejected on cosmetic grounds. The committee was told that making small changes to specifications such as a 2mm change to potato specifications could reduce waste by an estimated 15%!

Combat wastage

The report recommended a variety of measures to combat the problem of wastage, including incorporating lessons into the national curriculum about food waste and setting a national food waste target for England, as well as funding charities to raise more awareness about this problem in the public domain.

Food businesses also came under the spotlight with suggestions for supermarkets to publish data on the amount of food wasted, with some being forced to separate waste food for collection. Retailers are also told to improve their packaging to help food last longer, as well as a suggested change to the way various “expiration” dates are displayed. Many people appear to confuse “Best before” dates with “Use by” dates, since foods are often perfectly safe to consume after their “Best before” dates, referring to the quality of the food rather than it “going bad” as is the case for “Use by” dates.

Charity

Retailers are also told to increase the amount of surplus edible food to charity. It is an indictment on our society that whilst millions of tonnes of edible food is being wasted per year, food poverty is at a record high, with record numbers visiting food banks and record numbers of food parcels being given out.

One of the simple yet solvable problems the report highlighted was that charities involved in collecting and distributing surplus food from retailers do not have the resources and manpower (mostly relying on volunteers) to collect food from retailers late at night. Had our brightest minds been concerned with solving such problems instead of the host of scapegoats and distractions many are preoccupied with then we would certainly see many more innovative solutions for such problems.

For example, the “Dabbawallahs” in Mumbai’s famous lunch delivery industry came up with this fantastic solution that has bridged the crucial (and deadly) gap between surplus and poverty:

At a time where even the prime minister Theresa May,[3] appears to refuse to remedy the record numbers of people in food poverty – including nurses having to use food banks due to 14% pay cuts thanks to ideological austerity – it is more important than ever for society to hold those responsible to account and develop our own solutions to the problems people suffer.

Muslims in particular should need no reminder of the importance of sharing resources including food to those in need, with the feeding of the needy stressed early on in the verses of the Qur’an revealed in Makkah, whilst there were only a handful of Muslims.

“Have you seen the one who denies the Recompense? For that is the one who drives away the orphan, and does not encourage the feeding of the poor…”[4]

“Have We not made for him two eyes? And a tongue and two lips? And have shown him the two ways? But he has not broken through the difficult pass. And what can make you know what is [breaking through] the difficult pass? It is the freeing of a slave. Or feeding on a day of severe hunger…”[5]

Moreover, the first thing the Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said upon entering Madina as its de facto leader, was as reported by the then Jewish leader Abdullah b. Salam (radiy Allahu ‘anhu):

The prophet ordered us not to leave anything in the plate and he said: “You do not know in which portion of your food Allah has put the Barakah (Blessing).”[7]

Although it is heartening to see mosques and Muslim organisations lead the way in many local areas, there is a long way to go before the existence of Islam and Muslims is fully enjoyed throughout the country, particularly by those in need – no matter how much those who profit from the status quo may hate it.

As we prepare for and enter Ramadan (God willing), let us take extra care with regards to both wastage and serving those in need.